Boston Bruins Grading Sweeney and the Bruins on their deadline moves

How do you grade Sweeney on his 2018 trade deadline?


  • Total voters
    218

bp13

Registered User
Dec 30, 2003
16,933
3,331
Visit site
I gave him a B+ and mostly I like that he finally made a real hockey trade. I also like the Wingels addition.

However I would take some issue with the suggestion that Nash was the biggest forward addition available or that Sweeney "went for it". Nash may be the biggest "name" player because of who he used to be, but there were other players in rumors who are simply better hockey players at this point or put up more points, like Kane, Hoffman, McDonagh, Karlsson, arguably Brassard, Saad, etc. Obviously not everyone moved and obviously Nash is a nice addition, but we should pump the brakes on the significance of this deal.

And I'm not saying this to pour cold water on it either...I gave Sweeney a B+. I'm just noting that Rick Nash is a .5PPG player for the last 3 years. Let's not make this out to be a blockbuster, it's just a relative blockbuster for Sweeney because he doesn't make trades.
 

AustinBruins

Registered User
Jul 31, 2010
103
8
B-. I think the Nash addition is fine and I really don't think Lindgren is ever going to be much of a player, even if they ever managed to sign him given the glut of LHD ahead of him in the prospect pool. I'm fine with losing O'Gara. Not crazy about Holden, but it's fine. I'm also fine with moving on from Spooner and using him as value in moving Beleskey.

The only thing I absolutely hate is that they retained any money on Beleskey. I'd have preferred to upgrade the pick or add in extra value to make the Rangers eat the full contract.

(Assuming there are no rules against it with the weird split of the current contract), it might actually be easier to trade the rest of the Beleskey contract in the offseason to a cap floor type team. That trade might cost a lesser pick than what it would have cost to trade the full contract to NYR.
 

GloryDaze4877

Barely Irrelevant
Jun 27, 2006
44,395
13,873
The Sticks (West MA)
I just wish there was ONE time where Sweeney made all of us say "trader Donny really made a GREAT deal here," ya know? Not saying we got taken to the cleaners by any means, but we undoubtedly paid full price for Nash. I like that he went for it and I love the other moves, but I'm having trouble giving Sweeney credit for the Nash deal.

Maybe I'm being overly critical, but its easy to buy a car if you go to the dealership and pay the sticker price.

I’m not saying this is you specifically, but first the refrain was that Sweeney couldn’t or didn’t want to make a trade. After he does go after a big fish at the deadline it becomes, I can’t really give him credit for the Nash deal because he paid fair value?

Wait, what? You can’t have it both ways :laugh:

It’s impossible to grade the deal until we see what Nash and the team does and what Lindgren and the first do (if ever). That being said, I think fans get way more caught up with who “won the deal” than the GM’s do. If a GM makes a deal that is good for both teams, do you think the rest of the GM’s are more or less likely to deal with that team?

It seems like it’s impossible to please a lot of people, no matter what you do?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Agent86

Fopppa

Registered User
Jan 3, 2009
2,557
1,291
I gave Sweeney a B. I think he targeted the correct player and was able to execute a deal.

On the other hand, there was no real "value add" on his part in terms of the negotiations when it came to the Nash deal. He paid the full rental price, thats for sure, and it seems like a deal that any one of us could have made. Maybe there wasnt any room to negotiate but its hard to give Sweeney an A when all he likely did was say "sure lets do it." He didn't give up any main core future assets so I think the trade is a big net positive for the team, but hard to give a GM credit for paying full price at the TDL.

Loved the Holden/Wingels deals, and getting rid of Vatrano for a 3rd.

I know a lot of folks were asking for players with term... But that wasn't appealing to me.

For example, I liked the idea of Hoffman when I first heard it. But that contract killed my enthusiasm. The increased flexibility for next season is part of why I appreciate what Sweeney was able to accomplish.

Now that I've been all rosy in his thread, I'll sour the mood a bit. Did we give up just as much for Rick Nash as the Lightning for McDonagh?

The Nash aquisition also included the Beleskey dump, which had to be a hard sell. If NYR buys him out that cap penalty looks very manageable.

And comparing the McD/Nash deals, Tampa added another prospect and a higher secondary pick on top of what the B's gave for Nash (if you look at Miller/Namestnikov and Spooner/Beleskey's cap as separate deals).
 

Tim Vezina Thomas

Registered User
Jun 4, 2009
11,342
629
I’m not saying this is you specifically, but first the refrain was that Sweeney couldn’t or didn’t want to make a trade. After he does go after a big fish at the deadline it becomes, I can’t really give him credit for the Nash deal because he paid fair value?

Wait, what? You can’t have it both ways :laugh:

It’s impossible to grade the deal until we see what Nash and the team does and what Lindgren and the first do (if ever). That being said, I think fans get way more caught up with who “won the deal” than the GM’s do. If a GM makes a deal that is good for both teams, do you think the rest of the GM’s are more or less likely to deal with that team?

It seems like it’s impossible to please a lot of people, no matter what you do?

I think its implied that you cant really grade the deal until you see Nash play..but if everyone said that in message boards you wouldn't have anything to talk about.

I am pleased with what Sweeney did at the TDL, but I am MORE pleased with the entire FO (and ownership) being willing to go for it and pay fair value for an upgrade.

This thread is to grade Sweeney on his moves though, so I guess I have a hard time giving him an A when he paid the exact price they were looking for.
 

BigBear83

Registered User
Jan 29, 2013
835
327
Haverhill, NH
Gave a B-, i liked the depth moves. Am i the only one that would have rather had Kane than Nash.. we pretty much know that we are playing the leafs, i feel like kane has a lot more left and can play the style that keeps up with the leafs pace. i guess im just jealous that the sharks got him for a 2nd and fringe high talent prospect. All in all i was afraid of losing an important future piece. and while Lindgren hurts, theres other guys that would have hurt a lot more. Very glad that we didnt overpay for mcdonaugh . i like him just not at the price they wanted... i wonder what the bruins offer was?
 

GloryDaze4877

Barely Irrelevant
Jun 27, 2006
44,395
13,873
The Sticks (West MA)
I know a lot of folks were asking for players with term... But that wasn't appealing to me.

For example, I liked the idea of Hoffman when I first heard it. But that contract killed my enthusiasm. The increased flexibility for next season is part of why I appreciate what Sweeney was able to accomplish.

Now that I've been all rosy in his thread, I'll sour the mood a bit. Did we give up just as much for Rick Nash as the Lightning for McDonagh?

I don’t think so?

If Miller and Namestnikov kind of cancel each other out (different players), then it becomes:

McD for Howden, Hajek, late 1st, Cond 2nd


If Spooner was the “cost” of getting rid of Beleskey, the Nash deal becomes:

Nash for Late 1st, Lindgren, 2019 7th.


Howden was a late 1st, but was good in the AHL late last year, is having a very good WHL season, and tore up the WJC’s.

I’m not that familiar with Hajek, but he was a higher 2nd than Lindgren, and was another guy that was lights out at the WJC’s. From what people are saying, he has a much better upside than Lindgren?

So, why don’t we say the Conditional 2nd is equal to Lindgren? Both 2018 1sts will be late. So, unless you think Howden and Hajek are equal to a 7th round pick, I would say that TB gave up significantly more for McD than Boston did for Nash (as they should have).
 

GloryDaze4877

Barely Irrelevant
Jun 27, 2006
44,395
13,873
The Sticks (West MA)
I think its implied that you cant really grade the deal until you see Nash play..but if everyone said that in message boards you wouldn't have anything to talk about.

I am pleased with what Sweeney did at the TDL, but I am MORE pleased with the entire FO (and ownership) being willing to go for it and pay fair value for an upgrade.

This thread is to grade Sweeney on his moves though, so I guess I have a hard time giving him an A when he paid the exact price they were looking for.

We don’t know what the Rangers were initially looking for. I would say that Sweeney gave up fair market value for Nash. Isn’t that what he’s supposed to do?

I’m not saying he deserved an A+, and there is always room for an improvement, but I’m not going to give him a poorer grade because he was fair.
 

Tim Vezina Thomas

Registered User
Jun 4, 2009
11,342
629
We don’t know what the Rangers were initially looking for. I would say that Sweeney gave up fair market value for Nash. Isn’t that what he’s supposed to do?

I’m not saying he deserved an A+, and there is always room for an improvement, but I’m not going to give him a poorer grade because he was fair.

We don't know much about anything that happened, but given that the Rangers pulled the trigger the day before the TDL suggests they were very pleased with the return. They had 24+ hours to wait if they didn't get what they were looking for.

Anyways, I think a B is a fair grade.
 

GloryDaze4877

Barely Irrelevant
Jun 27, 2006
44,395
13,873
The Sticks (West MA)
We don't know much about anything that happened, but given that the Rangers pulled the trigger the day before the TDL suggests they were very pleased with the return. They had 24+ hours to wait if they didn't get what they were looking for.

Anyways, I think a B is a fair grade.

That’s fine, it’s your grade.

I don’t read anything into agreeing to the deal a day early. I think a lot of teams don’t like to leave the deals until the last minute. In the case of the Rangers, they had a bunch of potential players to move so I’m not surprised they did a couple deals early.
 

alg363636

Boo
Apr 25, 2014
8,700
3,361
Washington, DC
I have a bitter taste in my mouth but I think it's mostly from the two stinkers we put on this weekend and that's getting intertwined with my feelings about the deadline.

I went B.

I like Rick Nash and I think the team needed him. I also think we paid a little too much especially since we still have 50% of Beleskey's contract. I hope we can resign him to a nice contract because we're not front runners for the cup (especially with Tampa getting McD) and we gave up a lot for a rental. Would have loved the first to be conditional on making it to the second round or him resigning.

Gionta was dumb but irrelevent. Wingels and Vatrano were good. Holden is meh.

Would have liked a better D trade.

Overall fine. Tampa Pitt and Winnepeg all killed it though
 

Tim Vezina Thomas

Registered User
Jun 4, 2009
11,342
629
That’s fine, it’s your grade.

I don’t read anything into agreeing to the deal a day early. I think a lot of teams don’t like to leave the deals until the last minute. In the case of the Rangers, they had a bunch of potential players to move so I’m not surprised they did a couple deals early.

Could be. Obviously my grade could change if I knew the whole story. Maybe Sweeney wrestled with the idea of trading Debrusk and finally negotiated him out of the deal.

On the surface Sweeney gave up fair market value for a player 24+ hours before the TDL. Liked the deal now and still do but was it really Sweeneys negotiating skills that closed the deal? Who knows.
 

Lord Ahriman

Registered User
Oct 21, 2009
6,551
1,686
Solid A-

I never wanted Sweeney as our GM and didn't like most of his trades (always said he is very good about players development and draft) 'till this deadline. This time he surprised me very much. I think more money (Beleskey) gone would be better, but it's not a big deal.
 

maxl7

Registered User
Jun 14, 2017
1,442
1,445
(Assuming there are no rules against it with the weird split of the current contract), it might actually be easier to trade the rest of the Beleskey contract in the offseason to a cap floor type team. That trade might cost a lesser pick than what it would have cost to trade the full contract to NYR.
Not possible, unfortunately. Once you retain salary, you can't offload that onto another team. They're stuck with his 50% on the books for the remainder of his contract or half of his buyout cap hit for four years if he's bought out.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AustinBruins

RustyBruins72

Registered User
Jul 29, 2005
4,791
1,915
A-
Added strength to popgun second line.
Added depth on the blueline.
Added truculence on the 4th line.
Got rid of Belesky.

All without giving up anything that negatively impacts the room or robs Peter to pay Paul.

I would have liked an upgrade on the blueline but prices were nuts.
Maybe that comes at the draft.

Overall, a solid TDL by DS

Couldn't agree more. Well done DS!
 

BruinsPortugal

Registered User
Dec 3, 2009
5,045
1,680
Portugal
I gave him a B+, i think he did great.

Nash was a need and is a great fit here. I dont love the fact that we gave up a first but after all the deals that went trough, that was more than fair price. And seeing everyone that we have in the pipeline, im not worried. Getting rid of Beleskey was great too.
Donato, Bjork and JFK will all be fighting for spots next year and to be honest i have no clue how and where they fit.

Wingels was also a need and i think it was a great deal.

Truthfully, this deadline was completely different from recent years and its good to have our GM being aggressive, idetifying a need and going for it.

I still would've liked to see an upgrade at 3rd line C and thats why the grade is not higher.

As for another top4 dman, i think he could've gotten McDonagh but i like that he didnt mess with what we have. But maybe im biased because i like Carlo and Krug :laugh: If it doesnt work out, he will have the summer to rework the top4.
 

Bergyesque

Been there, done that.
Mar 11, 2014
1,112
660
Laval, QC, Canada
Went B+
Like all the additions and I'm fine with the cost; the prospect pool was basically left intact.
Only negatives is I would have like no retention on Beleskey, I would have prefer only one trade with the Rangers (for both Holden and Nash; might have cost a little less) and I'm still not sold on the C depth.
Very good job overall
 

bp13

Registered User
Dec 30, 2003
16,933
3,331
Visit site
Kucherov is now injured and his buddy Namestnikov is gone. Their O will struggle for a while. The two Ranger add won't move the needle one bit.

When the playoffs come and matchups become crucial, I would think the ability to roll out either Hedman and McDonagh for 90% of the game would be a pretty big plus.
 

WhalerTurnedBruin55

Fading out, thanks for the times.
Oct 31, 2008
11,346
6,708
I am conditionally voting for B.

Every play off round they win, I'd say his grade goes up a notch.

Win Round 1: B+
Win Round 2: A-
Win Conference: A
Win the Cup: A+
 

PlayMakers

Moderator
Aug 9, 2004
25,221
25,085
Medfield, MA
www.medpuck.com
I know a lot of folks were asking for players with term... But that wasn't appealing to me.

For example, I liked the idea of Hoffman when I first heard it. But that contract killed my enthusiasm. The increased flexibility for next season is part of why I appreciate what Sweeney was able to accomplish.

Now that I've been all rosy in his thread, I'll sour the mood a bit. Did we give up just as much for Rick Nash as the Lightning for McDonagh?

I hear you about term. But term on McDonagh I wouldn't mind. Depends on the player, I suppose.

With regard to the return on McDonagh, I thought about that earlier myself, and it's hard to compare because TB got Miller too, but I think a comparable package from the Bruins would be: Spooner, Frederic, Zboril, a 1st and a 2nd. That's certainly more than we gave up for Nash, and it's a lot to give up for McDonagh if he doesn't re-sign.
 

Montecristo

Registered User
Jul 29, 2012
6,921
2,146
I gave don an A. His best trade deadline as a gm. I will ask this question though. If ny wanted a first a second, zboril, frederic and heinen for mcdonagh and Miller would you pull the trigger?

That’s the closest comp to tampas package I could think of. I’d certainly think about it, Miller is similar to heinen so that’s a wash although he’s due for a raise. Zboril is similar to hajek to me and Fredric the same with howden. They’d probably have to make the money work though
 

GloryDaze4877

Barely Irrelevant
Jun 27, 2006
44,395
13,873
The Sticks (West MA)
Gave a B-, i liked the depth moves. Am i the only one that would have rather had Kane than Nash.. we pretty much know that we are playing the leafs, i feel like kane has a lot more left and can play the style that keeps up with the leafs pace. i guess im just jealous that the sharks got him for a 2nd and fringe high talent prospect. All in all i was afraid of losing an important future piece. and while Lindgren hurts, theres other guys that would have hurt a lot more. Very glad that we didnt overpay for mcdonaugh . i like him just not at the price they wanted... i wonder what the bruins offer was?

Yes.

It doesn’t tell you something that the most BUF could get for Kane was that paltry haul? The only way a team was going to take a chance on Kane was at a hugely discounted price.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->